Elements Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

Elements required to prove a crime

A

Actus Reus (voluntary, physical act);
Mens Rea (mental state);
Concurrence (requisite mens rea must exist at the time of the actus reus); and
Causation (cause-in-fact/actual + proximate cause) (usually needed, but not always, e.g. attempted murder)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What is the burden of proof for each element of a crime?

A

Beyond a reasonable doubt

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Are habitual acts (conditioned reactions) considered voluntary acts?

A

Yes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

What are examples of involuntary acts?

A
  • Reflexes;
  • Bodily movements during unconsciousness or sleep;
  • Actions during hypnosis; or
  • A bodily movement that is otherwise not the product of the effort or determination of the actor, either conscious or habitual
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Do involuntary acts satisfy the actus reus?

A

No, unless:
1. D is aware that they have a condition that can result in involuntary actions; and
2. Fails to take reasonable steps to prevent such actions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

When is possession deemed a voluntary act?

A

When the defendant is aware of his control of the contraband fo a sufficient period of time to have been able to terminate the possession

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Are acts performed under duress considered voluntary acts?

A

Yes
⚠️ Note: duress can be a valid defense. See the deck on defenses.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

When does failure to act constitute the actus reus?

A
  1. There was a legal duty to act;
  2. D was aware of such duty; and
  3. D could have reasonably performed the act
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Under what circumstances is there a legal duty to act?

A
  1. Special relationship (ex. parent/child);
  2. Statutory or contractual duty (ex. firefighter or lifeguard); or
  3. Voluntary undertaking that leaves Victim worse off than before
  4. Defendant created the peril/risk
  5. By Statute- (ex. paying taxes, ships captain duty to stay on sinking ship, etc.)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Define

mens rea

A

D’s state of mind during a crime. D must have “culpable state of mind” to be convicted of a crime

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Do strict liability crimes have a required mens rea?

A

No, it is sufficient that the act was performed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What are the 4 main categories of strict liability crimes?

A

Remember MARS: “life is strict on Mars”

  • Morality crimes (bigamy)
  • Administrative crimes
  • Regulatory crimes
  • Statutory rape
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What intent do specific intent crimes require?

A

Subjective intent to cause a specific outcome

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What are some common specific intent crimes?

A
  • Burglary
  • Robbery
  • Assault
  • Murder
  • Attempt
  • Conspiracy
  • Theft crimes (embezzlement, larceny, false pretenses, forgery)
  • Solicitation

Remember acronym “BRAM-ACTS”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What do general intent crimes require?

A

D intended to commit the criminal act

⚠️ Note: Unlike specific intent, general intent crimes do not require subjective intent to bring about a certain result; only to commit the act itself

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What are the 5 main general intent crimes?

A

Battery
Rape
Kidnapping
False imprisonment
Manslaughter

Remember: BRIK-Slaughter

17
Q

What are the 4 categories of mens rea under common law?

A
  1. Specific intent;
  2. General intent;
  3. Negligence;
  4. Recklessness
18
Q

What are the 4 categories of mens rea under the MPC?

A

Purposely (subjective)
Knowingly (subjective)
Recklessly (subjective)
Negligently (objective)

19
Q

When does D act “purposely” for the purposes of MPC mens rea?

A

With the conscious objective to produce the result or engage in the particular behavior

⭐️ Subjective standard

20
Q

When does D act “knowingly” for the purposes of MPC mens rea?

A

When he knows that a course of action will almost certainly produce a specific result

⭐️ Subjective standard

21
Q

Differentiate between purposely and knowingly

A

Purposely: D desires to produce a specific result

Knowingly: D is aware that a specific result is almost certain to occur

Ex. If Max shoots Brianne at close range and kills her, he has acted “purposely”

However, if Max means to kill Brianne, and he places a bomb in the car that he knows is carrying both Brianne and Mat, it is unlikely he could be charged with “purposely” killing Mat, but will likely be charged with “knowingly” killing Mat

22
Q

When does D act “recklessly” for the purposes of MPC mens rea?

A

When D “consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk”

⚠️ Note: Majority uses a subjective standard, minority uses an objective standard

23
Q

When does D act “negligently” for the purposes of MPC mens rea?

A

When, regardless of whether D was actually aware of the risk, D should have been aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk

24
Q

Differentiate between criminal negligence & civil negligence

A

Criminal negligence: gross deviation from the normal standard of care

Civil negligence: deviation from the normal standard of care

25
Q

Causation requires both (blank) cause and (blank) cause

A

Actual cause (“cause-in-fact) and proximate cause

26
Q

What does concurrence require?

A

Concurrence between:

The mental state and the act; and
The mind and the result
⚠️ Note: If the result is too attenuated from the original intent, there will likely be no concurrence and no liability

27
Q

What are two tests to determine whether actual cause exists?

A

1. “But for” causation: Criminal result would not have occurred “but for” D’s act; or
2. Substantial Factor: D’s acts were a substantial factor in causing the criminal result (e.g. D’s acts shorten V’s life or speeds up their inevitable death)
3.
⭐️ The decision whether to use the “but for” test or “substantial factor” test is state specific.

28
Q

Define

MPC proximate cause

A

Exists when the actual result involves the same kind of harm that the D “designed or contemplated” and is not too “remote or accidental.”

29
Q

What should you ask when determining whether proximate cause exists?

A

Is the connection between the act and the harm so attenuated that it is unfair to hold D liable for that harm?

30
Q

Define:

doctrine of transferred intent

A

If D intends to harm against one party but inadvertently harms another party, D’s original intent is“transferred” to the actual victim

31
Q

Does the doctrine of transferred intent apply if the victim was unforeseeable? (ex. D intends to shoot A but actually shoots B)

A

Yes.

For example, if Max shoots into a car intending to kill Kathy, but a jogger runs in front of the car at the exact moment the shot was fired and is killed, Max will still be liable.

32
Q

Does the doctrine of transferred intent apply if the victim was unforeseeable? (ex. D intends to shoot A but actually shoots B)

A

Yes.

For example, if Max shoots into a car intending to kill Kathy, but a jogger runs in front of the car at the exact moment the shot was fired and is killed, Max will still be liable.

33
Q

V dies in an unforeseen manner not intended by D. Is D still liable?

A

Yes, if:

  • D directly caused V’s harm
    For example, D likely still liable even if the injury is different than what the D intended (shooting in the foot vs. the head) and even if harm the occurs in a different way than what D intended;
  • V had a pre-existing condition that exacerbated the harm (Eggshell rule); or
  • V died from fright or stress
34
Q

Is D still liable if there is a foreseeable intervening event?

A

Yes, D will likely still be liable because the causal chain has not been broken.

Ex. Carly pushes Max while ice skating, and Max falls and breaks his hip on the ice. Causation exists because it is forseeable that Max would fall on the ice if pushed.

35
Q

Define:

superceding cause

A

Unforeseeable intervening cause.

Absolves D of liability if both the act and the injury are unforeseeable.

For example, D punches V on the arm, after which V returns home, uninjured. That night, a burglar breaks into V’s home and and shoots V in the arm. Causation for the gunshot does not exist for D.

36
Q

If, after D causes V injury, V dies as a result of medical treatment, is D still liable?

A

Yes, unless the medical treatment was performed in a grossly negligent or reckless manner.

⚠️ Note: Medical treatment performed in an ordinarily negligent manner is NOT sufficient to supercede, it must be grossly negligent or reckless

37
Q

Will a third party’s failure to act absolve the D of liability?

(Ex. D shoots V and a bystander refuses to render aid that would have saved V)

A

No, never

38
Q

If V voluntarily subjects himself to harm (e.g. playing Russian Roulette), does that absolve D of liability?

A

No, generally not

39
Q

When two offenses are greater and lesser included offenses, can a defendant be convicted of both crimes for a single offense?

A

No
Ex. (Ex. Robbery= larceny + force or threat of immediate harm. Defendant can’t be convicted for both for the same transaction)